general defences

Question 1

insanity under PC

Answer 1

s 84 of PC, read with s 251+252 of CPC

unsound mind = insane person

Question 2

intoxication - 3 defences under PC

Answer 2

s 85 read with 86 general provision for intoxication

• 85(2) involuntary intoxication
• 85(3) insane intoxication when read with 84
• 86(2) and 85prolonged and high end abuser such that some substantial dmaage had been done to the brain –> able to rely on DR

Question 3

insanity requirements

Answer 3

suffering from abnormality of mind during the commission of act - which would be determined by aetiological findings and also determining whether the abnormality of mind had substantially impaired the mental responsiubilty,

AND

1. incap of knowing nature= surface reaches + conseq of act; or
2. incap of knowing act is wrong by ORM standards = contrary to law; or
3. incapable of controlling his actions, by means of an irresistible impulse stemming from an internal cause

Question 4

cases of insanity - successful

Answer 4

1. boon yu kai john v pp - charged under telecommunications act for calling the police to make a false report about a killer wanting to murder his mom. Suffered from delusional disorder/ schizophrenia
   court held he incap of knowing wrongfulness of act; genuinely believed that what he said on phone calls were true
   AOM proved by medical inquiry, revealing his schizophrenic disorder which would substnatilly impair his mental responsibilty.
   MR of crime was negated
   –> case also laid out approach to insnaity defence: establish AR, then look to see if MR can be negated by insanity defences

Question 5

cases of insanity - unsuc

Answer 5

1. sinnasamy - wasnt successful because last time didnt have 84(c). if have then now can - epileptic episode, killed his daughter, insane automatism due to internal causes
2. kwong kok hing - pushed gf onto train track but she didnt die , he had depressive disorder, could establish AOM but not enought to establish the three reqts of insanity
3. rozmman bin jusoh - convicted for trafficking under MDA, found to have subnormal IQ nad intellectual disability , but not legally insane becaseu he knew that what he was doing was wrong and caapbale of appreciating the nature of his act

Question 6

cases of intox - suc

Answer 6

1.

Question 7

cases of intox - unsuc

Answer 7

1. tan chor jin - was able to exceut ehis plan accrodingly. The manner in wihch he dealt with the other family members in V’s house showed that he had a presence of mind and he was not compleltely undetr the influecne of alcohol so as to render him incapable of knowing what he was doing